ArticleGut and liver2024
Real-World Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding for Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin Users: A Distributed Network Analysis Using a Common Data Model.
Article in Gut and liver, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse Events Associated with Advanced Therapy Compared with Conventional Therapy in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Common Data Model Analysis.Gut and liver · 2026Observational
- Nationwide Trends in Gastrointestinal Bleeding Mortality Before and After the Widespread Adoption of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the United States, 2007-2020.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Prevention of Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients Receiving Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Narrative Review and Practical Framework for Prescribers.Clinics and practice · 2026Review
- Impact of prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass on gastrointestinal complications in cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- Risk of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug (NSAID) and Proton Pump Inhibitor Users Compared with NSAID-Only Users: A Common Data Model Analysis.Gut and liver · 2025Observational
- Oral Anticoagulants in Women: What's the Difference? A Narrative Review.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
- Narrative Review of Management Strategies and Risk Mitigation for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Receiving Warfarin.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Early studies on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reported a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) compared with warfarin; however, recent studies have reported a reduced risk. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the risk of GIB in users of DOAC and warfarin. Methods: Using a common data model, we investigated the comparative risk of GIB in subjects from eight hospitals who were newly prescribed DOACs or warfarin. We excluded subjects who had a prior history of GIB or had been prescribed both medications. After propensity score matching, we analyzed 3,347 matched pairs of new DOAC and new warfarin users. Results: The risk of GIB in new DOAC users was comparable to that in new warfarin users (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 1.40; p=0.808). New DOAC users had a similar risk of GIB to new warfarin users among older patients >65 years (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.52; p=0.997) and in older patients >75 years (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.68 to 2.10; p=0.509). In addition, the risk of GIB was not significantly different between two groups according to sex. We also found that the risk of GIB in DOAC users was 26% lower in edoxaban or apixaban subgroups compared to rivaroxaban or dabigatran subgroups (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.00; p=0.049). Conclusions: In real-world practice, the risk of GIB in new DOAC users is comparable to that in new warfarin users. In DOAC users, the risk of GIB was lower in edoxaban or apixaban subgroups than rivaroxaban or dabigatran subgroups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.